RAF Typhoon's scrambled yesterday (24/01/11)

Steyr

Hi all,

Been reported on another Forum that two RAF Typhoons were scrambled to intercept and escort an Airliner that had a UK passenger on boards making disturbing threats.


The Airliner was escorted into Stansted, Apparently it happened around 11am and involved an RAF VC-10 as a support tanker, one of the Typhoons maintained a CAP over RAF Marham after the Airliner was safely on the ground at Stansted.

Nothing else coming thru but if I get some info I will post.

RadioRetro

The Grauniad has more via PA.

nag

I don't get it. If (according to the Guardian) "there was no threat to safety", then why divert? Either the person mispoke or there's more to it than that.

Steyr

nag wrote: »

I don't get it. If (according to the Guardian) "there was no threat to safety", then why divert? Either the person mispoke or there's more to it than that.

Apparently he claimed to have a bomb.

RadioRetro

And the Idiot of the Week award goes to...

James Glen of Chelmsford!

Muppet Man

Jaysus, What an absolute clown...

You have to wonder though, what could the Tornado's have done... would they have been under orders to shoot it down if it didnt follow /divert to stanstead...

Muppet Man

Dogwatch

Muppet Man wrote: »

Jaysus, What an absolute clown...

You have to wonder though, what could the Tornado's have done... would they have been under orders to shoot it down if it didnt follow /divert to stanstead...

Muppet Man

Yes, that is SOP.

Steyr

From another Source:

"A typhoon is currently on CAP over Marham call sign F4Y46, tanker support up call sign 5DU62 (VC-10) has shut down an engine. Typhoon has been refuelled and has 60mins playtime. Comms on 270.150

Etihad Airways A340 flight call sign ETD19 was the aircraft intercepted."

BrianD

Dogwatch wrote: »

Yes, that is SOP.

I would very much doubt that there is a SOP for this. I can't imagine that a pilot would be allowed make that decision.

Steyr

Muppet Man wrote: »

Jaysus, What an absolute clown...

You have to wonder though, what could the TYPHOONS have done... would they have been under orders to shoot it down if it didnt follow /divert to stanstead...

Muppet Man

Fixed for you :cool:

;)

Steyr

BrianD wrote: »

I would very much doubt that there is a SOP for this. I can't imagine that a pilot would be allowed make that decision.

That is their SOP. But before that it is to act as a deterrent to say "Before you crash her we will shoot you so you wont have the chance"

Holybejaysus

Is it just me, or do the majority of these 'threats' involve drunken passengers? Maybe they ought to rethink the alcohol policy on aircraft.

BrianD

Steyr wrote: »

That is their SOP. But before that it is to act as a deterrent to say "Before you crash her we will shoot you so you wont have the chance"

I'm sorry. I don't believe you. There can not be a SOP - Standard Operating Procedure - that authorises the shooting down of a civilian airliner. Any situation would be unique and I'd dare say you'd have to have the PM on the blower before pressing fire. Therefore it wouldn't be standard.

Steyr

BrianD wrote: »

I'm sorry. I don't believe you. There can not be a SOP - Standard Operating Procedure - that authorises the shooting down of a civilian airliner. Any situation would be unique and I'd dare say you'd have to have the PM on the blower before pressing fire. Therefore it wouldn't be standard.

From the Sun but you get the idea, by your reasoning you may as well get rid of the RAF or any Air arm if they are not going to protect their skies and the people on the ground.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/3066995/RAF-jets-practise-shooting-down-hijacked-airliner.html

By SIMON HUGHES, Chief Investigative Reporter
and JOHN KAY, Chief Reporter

Published: 24 Jul 2010

RAF fighter pilots staged a dramatic rehearsal of plans to shoot down a passenger jet hijacked by terrorists.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, Home Secretary Theresa May and Security Minister Dame Pauline Neville-Jones were on stand-by throughout to give the order to open fire.


Two Eurofighter Typhoons armed with cannons and missiles were scrambled from RAF Coningsby, Lincs, to intercept the incoming plane.


Their crews believed the threat was real and were not told it was a practice drill until the last minute.

It has been government policy since the 9/11 terror attacks in America in 2001 to shoot down as a last resort any aircraft posing a threat in UK airspace.


If the RAF cannot make contact or the intruder fails to obey instructions, a senior government figure has to make the chilling decision to blast a packed airliner from the sky.


The exercise was a grim necessity, due to fears that a high-profile event like the London Olympics in 2012 will offer an inviting target for extremists.


John Yates, the Metropolitan Police counter-terror chief, and senior security and military figures were also involved in the operation earlier this month, which was co-ordinated from Whitehall in London.


Prime Minister David Cameron was aware of the dummy run but was not directly involved on the day. Further training missions are expected.


An anti-terror source said: "The aim was to run through the responses needed to confront an aircraft in terrorist hands.


"The inescapable reality is that such an aircraft, even if it was a passenger jet, would have to be shot down if that was the only way to prevent a strike on Britain. It would be agonising for those involved but there would be no alternative. One concern which has to be addressed is that the London Olympics could be targeted.


"A key tactic would be to intercept a suspect plane over the sea. The decision to destroy it would be taken by a senior government minister."


Terrorists hijacked four passengers jets in the US to carry out the 9/11 massacre, which killed 2,976 people.


And British Islamic terrorists are serving life for plotting to blow up transatlantic jets. The source added: "We know that targeting aircraft is an ongoing al-Qaeda priority."


Last night the Home Office confirmed: "Government departments and other agencies took part in a major incident exercise on July 8. It was an important test of contingency plans."

Steyr

http://unhypnotize.com/world-news/28239-how-blair-seconds-ordering-raf-shoot-down-passenger-plane-over-london-aft.html


How Blair was seconds from ordering RAF to shoot down passenger plane over London

Tim Shipman
Daily Mail
Thursday, September 2, 2010

Tony Blair came close to ordering the RAF to shoot down a passenger airliner over London after the 9/11 attacks on the United States, he reveals in his memoirs.

The former prime minister described how fighter jets were scrambled after the aircraft lost contact with air traffic control as it approached the capital.

Mr Blair was given emergency powers to authorise the military to bring down planes after the September 11 2001 atrocities in which terrorists crashed airliners into the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington DC.

Mr Blair recalled in his book: ‘A passenger jet had been out of contact for some time, and was heading over London.

‘I had the senior RAF commander authorised to get my decision. The fighter jet was airborne. For several anxious minutes we talked, trying desperately to get an instinct as to whether this was threat or mishap. The deadline came. I decided we should hold back.

‘Moments later the plane regained contact. It had been a technical error. I needed to sit down and thank God for that one!

Steyr

http://www.rense.com/general31/shootdown.htm

How The RAF Will Shoot
Down Commercial Airliners
By Jason Allardyce and Brian Brady
Scotland Sunday.com

The rules of engagement for RAF pilots dealing with rogue aircraft are chillingly straightforward.

Documents seen by Scotland on Sunday reveal that Tornado pilots have been told to give civilian aircraft suspected of posing a threat just two chances to turn away or land before blowing them out of the sky - hijackers, innocent passengers and all.

The same pilots have even been given special psychological training to cope with the enormity of what they may be ordered to do.

The instructions set out in a partially censored Ministry of Defence memo underline how seriously the government now takes the threat of a terrorist assault on Britain in the wake of the September 11 attacks.

The memo states: "If the pilot of the intercepted aircraft refuses to comply with orders... the pilot of the fighter aircraft... may then authorise the use of a knife-edge manoeuvre to show the pilot of the intercepted aircraft that the intercepting fighter is armed.

"If this fails to elicit a response, *** may order a warning burst of gunfire (any warning burst is to be fired from such a position so as to be immediately recognised by the intercepted pilot as a warning to reinforce the order to land and not an attack)."

During the engagement RAF pilots will report any manoeuvres by the intercepted rogue plane "construed as aggressive or evasive" before a decision is taken, ultimately by Tony Blair, to take it out.

Within minutes of intelligence picking up an unexpected deviation in the flight path of an aircraft towards a British terrorist target, the lives of all those aboard would be lost.

The military has drawn up the rules of engagement to avert potential attacks on over 350 critical national infrastructure sites identified by MI5, including the Houses of Parliament, the Bank of England and military bases and nuclear power plants in Scotland as well as England and Wales.

The procedures to be followed by the RAF,s Quick Response Aircraft team, understood to be based at Cornwall, East Anglia and RAF Leuchars in Fife, are not simply academic or the stuff of training exercises.

Military chiefs insist that the decision to shoot a hijacked civilian plane out of the sky to prevent a larger loss of human life and avoid "inevitable and irreparable evil" would not be taken lightly.

Aggressive manoeuvres can only take place after pilots have first attempted to obtain visual confirmation of a plane,s identity, by operator, aircraft type and registration number and where there is "no reasonable alternative" to the use of force.

While RAF patrols are in the air, communications staff on the ground will watch the location, height and speed of the suspect aircraft, including the potential remaining duration of flight and range of the aircraft.

The memo notes that the degree of force must be "proportional". "In circumstances where a rogue civilian aircraft carries only hijackers and, if brought down would crash without further loss of human life, the application of the principles of proportionality will be uncomplicated.

"Much more difficult, however, is the use of force against a rogue civilian aircraft which will directly threaten the lives of passengers and crew on board that aircraft who are innocent of any crime and who are being held against their will.

"Further, if a downed aircraft is likely to fall in a location where there is a risk of causing further loss of life on the ground, the application of the principle becomes significantly more complicated. "

But this will be judged appropriate if it seems likely that those innocents on board are likely to die "in a very short time" anyway and if the loss of life from shooting it down is "not disproportionate to the consequences which are expected from not doing so".

Another MoD memo reveals that Britain,s defence capability to deal with rogue aircraft also extends to RAF and Army Ground Based Air Defence assets, including high velocity missiles .

Royal Navy air defence ships also carry Sea Dart surface to air missiles and many ships are equipped with Sea Wolf point defence missiles.

The acutely sensitive nature of the issue has persuaded ministers that only they must be allowed to give the final instruction to shoot down a civilian aircraft.

But Scotland on Sunday has learned that senior MoD figures are pressing for this to change. They have warned privately how they fear the requirement to wait for politicians to act could ultimately cost lives.

Handing responsibility to the MoD would bring the chain of command into line with the US where the military has the authority to shoot down civilian aircraft, consulting politicians all the way to the President if time permits.

In evidence, Desmond Bowen, MoD,s director-general of operational policy, one of a group of key military chiefs charged with running the British leg of "Operation Enduring Freedom", acknowledged that "these are appallingly difficult judgements to make".

Steyr

Military want right to down passenger jets

Brian Brady and Jason Allardyce


SENIOR military officers want the right to shoot down civilian aircraft seized by suicidal terrorists, without consulting the Prime Minister.

Tony Blair is resisting the move, which would give the military absolute authority to order RAF jets to blow a hijacked aircraft out of the sky with the loss of hundreds of lives.

High-ranking military officials believe Britain should follow the lead set by the US in the wake of the September 11 attacks last year. American generals have the power to order the destruction of any hostile aircraft, if they do not have time to contact senior politicians.

Military officers in Britain fear that unless they are given the same powers, terrorists could bring down a fuel-laden plane, causing devastation, while they seek ministerial approval.

The Prime Minister, backed by Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon and senior MPs, has insisted the final judgment must remain with politicians.

But a senior ministerial source last night admitted the military might have to take on the responsibility in a critical situation.

He said: "There might be occasions when we have our suspicions an aircraft is foul,, but they can,t raise anybody to make the decision to shoot it down."

The clash between Blair and the military goes to the heart of Britain,s strategy for fending off an airborne attack of the type that killed thousands of people in the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington last year.

It emerged amid renewed warnings over the threats terrorists pose to British aircraft and airports. On Friday a flight from Prestwick to Dublin had to be evacuated after a hoax bomb alert at the Scottish airport.

Scotland on Sunday has learned that the RAF has set up special squadrons of Quick Response Aircraft (QRA), made up of Tornado fighters, at strategic sites including RAF Leuchars in Fife, Cornwall and East Anglia.

Pilots have been given special training - including counselling - to prepare them for the task of shooting down a civilian aircraft laden with passengers. They have been issued with rules of engagement detailing how they should identify, pursue and destroy aircraft displaying hostile intent,.

The QRA jets have been scrambled at least three times since September 11, to intercept aircraft they feared were heading for the Queen,s residence at Sandringham, the nuclear power plant at Sellafield or overflying the Midlands. Each was a false alarm.

But with Britain still on high alert for a terrorist attack, the question of who decides on the ultimate action against a rogue aircraft has yet to be resolved.

Last night an MoD insider said: "This is not about the military trying to keep hold of powers because they don,t want politicians to take them away.

"There are people who think the military command should at least have the flexibility to make that decision if there was a time pressure."

Senior MoD officers, who have drawn up a list of the 160 most likely targets for terrorist attack, including Downing Street, the Foreign Office and the BT Tower, have told members of the influential MPs, Defence Committee that the ultimate decision rests with ministers.

Desmond Bowen, the MoD,s director of general operational policy, said: "This is something we have consulted ministers on."

But the committee,s report on Britain,s protection against terrorism insisted: "Any decision to shoot down a suspected rogue civilian aircraft must be taken by ministers."

The recommendation was broadly backed by ministers, but a number of MPs have confirmed they were warned that senior figures within the MoD were unhappy with the policy.

One committee member said: "Under no circumstances can they shoot down an aircraft unless they get the political say-so to do that.

"But the flight time is something like 20 minutes from take-off at a London airport to the centre of the city - 10 minutes to get up and 10 minutes, flying time. The reality is that it doesn,t give much leeway for spotting a rogue plane, deciding it is hostile and then getting the say-so from politicians to destroy it."

Yesterday Liberal Democrat defence spokesman Paul Keetch called on the government to give the military the powers to shoot down any aircraft deemed to be posing a threat to targets on the ground.

BrianD

So both confirm indicate that there is no Standard Operating Procedure in placel. In fact even the rules of engagement (which is probably a better term to use than SOP) indicates that every situation is unique. There's an escalating scale of activity but no plane can be shot down without the say so of an authority on high.

Thankfully the military are not being allowed to exercise final orders on these matters given that most 'threats' are false alarms, drunken passengers or if a real event where the presence of a armed aircraft would be irrelevant.

However, it all feeds into the climate of fear that governments like to use to keep their citizens. Nothing like a news story of jets being scrambled to intercept a perceived threat. Unfortunately, the bad guys seem to be constantly innovating and it's unlikely that they would reuse the same 'spectacular' again. The "success" of the 9/11 attack was primarily owing to lax security. Most of these issues have been addressed and a repeat is a more difficult proposition.

Steyr

Sorry but did you read any of those Atricles?? It is an SOP that they would if need be.

The USAF can down an Airliner without higher authority, but the RAF need a higher response and have come close to it.

Obviously we all hope it would never come to it, but if need be it will happen.